In Response to Re: Bill James:"Dwight Evans belongs in Cooperstown" : An open letter to the Hall of Fame : It was James's point. Not mine. And Reggie Jackson was not one for comparison because he was a half decade older and was not just considered for the hall, but in the hall. Winfield, Cedeno, Parker, Evans, Burroughs, and Cowens were all born in the same year, all very good RFers (except Cedeno, who played CF) and all put on the hall ballot. Read the link. You will understand James's points better and understand that I was just defending his position. Oh, and yes. I consider Evans a better RFer than Jackson. But that is not to say that Jackson wasn't the better or more HOF worthy player. I might even choose Jackson as my RFer on a fantasy team over Evans, but I would not say he was the better RFer. Indicative in that, for me, is how the position was played. I said that in my lifetime Evans was the best RFer I ever say with the possible exception of Clemente. This was NOT a comparison of hitters on my part, nor do I believe it was on the part of the poster I was responding to.Posted by parhunter1

Imo Evan was a great ballplayer I just don't think he belongs in the hall.

I know he's a fan favorite here but I have the same problem with Jorge Posada in debating with Yankee fans, same can be said of Bernie Williams just not quite there.

In Response to Re: Bill James:"Dwight Evans belongs in Cooperstown" : An open letter to the Hall of Fame : the Hall does not compare players of different eras. They choose players who play from the same era. Some say the stipulation should be around being the best at your position for a decade or more. I believe that is the point of view implicit in James's thesis. That said: Take out the guys who were not contemporaries (Herman, Oliva, Ashburn, Hoy, O'Doul, and Belle) and those who did not play RF (Williams, Raines, Oliver-who spent most of his career as a marginal OF/1B and ended it as a 1b/DH) and your list is down to Parker, Walker and Belle. James provided proof as to why Evans was actually the better hitter, and far better fielder than Parker. And I already said I consider Walker deserving of consideration along with Evans (and over Parker). But Belle? Are you kidding? He has the inferior offensive stats AND couldn't hold a candle to Evans as a fielder. Was Belle even ever on a ballot?Posted by parhunter1

Good idea? Maybe. James' thesis? Yes. But does the Hall operate that way? Absolutely not. They certainly don't take position vs. era into account, else they would not have been in operation for nealy 40 years with only three inducted third basemen.

As it stands now, Evans is not and would not be compared to his comtemporarioes in RF. He is evaluated against all outfielders of all eras, with certain era-related criteria taken into consideration.

Therefore, removing players who did not play RF might be James' argument, but he is already redefining the process. When it comes to awards and ballots, for some reason MLB does not differentiate between OF positions.

I actually checked and James' himself has most of those guys ahead of Evans (who is not listed) on the Hall of Fame monitor. That list includes Parker, giving James an argument both ways, I guess.

And Oliver was not a "marginal" outfielder or 1b. He was a seven time All Star with 3 Silver Sluggers, 9 top 20 MVP finishes, and a lifetime .300 average with over 2700 hits. Evans trails him in every single category I just mentioned. Not to mention, Oliver started out his career as a CF, although he might be more remembered for his days at 1B anf LF later in his career. Still he played more games in CF than any other position.

As for Albert Belle, are you serious? He was an offensive monster. .295 / .369 / .574 career line over 13 seasons. Only player ever with a 50 double/50 HR season, and would have won AL MVP in 1995 had he not been such an unpleasant person. (Mo Vaughn thanks him.) His downfall was the injuries that slowed his career, and that he was extremely disliked in the media. Evans has a huge defensive advange over Belle, but nothing else. Although I guess you were referring to the fact that Evans did hit 4 more home runs than Belle, and only took 7 more seasons to do it....

Oliver was a marginal OFer. That is not to be confused with whether he was a good hitter or not. He was also marginal at 1b, whih is why he ended up a DH. The guys who get into the hall generally are good hitters and good fielders. Belle and Oliver do not qualify in that regard. The issue going forward is how the hall deals with DHs. E. Martinez and Ortiz have HOF offensive careers primarily put up as DHs. What will the hall voters do with that? That will be interesting to see.

Oliver was a marginal OFer. That is not to be confused with whether he was a good hitter or not. He was also marginal at 1b, whih is why he ended up a DH. The guys who get into the hall generally are good hitters and good fielders. Belle and Oliver do not qualify in that regard. The issue going forward is how the hall deals with DHs. E. Martinez and Ortiz have HOF offensive careers primarily put up as DHs. What will the hall voters do with that? That will be interesting to see.Posted by parhunter1

Not even remotely true, especially for outfielders. Jim Rice, for example, was not a good OF.

If the argument for Evans is he was the second best RF of his era, it is a weak argument in that thta is simply not how the Hall inducts players.

I looked it up, and on Bill James' Hall of Fame monitor, he pegs Al Oliver as a worthy cadidate with a scre of 116. Evans did not make his list.

But the bottom line is, I said there were a dozen more OF worthy of HOF than Evans. you have taken exception to two names, what about the other 10?